• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rep. Maxine Waters says "Tea Party can go straight to hell"

No, you didn't say you were a centrist. But you do have famous tags as "Leftist, what ever that is", and even here you try and take a quasi intellectual position portraying yourself as some kind of voice of reason, when in fact you are among the worst offenders using one line trolls designed to bait an argument.

I am done with you for now dude, the dishonesty is making my blood pressure raise.

j-mac

You miss the point of that. I don't call myself a leftist either. Like most people, I just hold certain beliefs, some left, some right. For example, I would never sugegst anyone I care about have an abortion. It is simplistic and often wrong to label without meaning. You use it to marginalize who your talking to, and thus stunt discourse and discussion. This is a problem, and one of the major problems we face in the political arean today. Those who speak this way, be it left or right, are the problem.

And i say again j, you don't know honesty from dishonesty. If you did, you might want to look in the mirror.
 
bite me dude, you can't even take a little humor without being a jerk.

j-mac

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...nding-246-436-per-new-job.html#post1058410494
Wow, you libs are thin skinned.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...nish-my-answers-next-time.html#post1059420023
What a child this man is. Thin skinned, and unwilling to be challenged in his answers to tough questions.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...83028-reid-ropes-nevada-8.html#post1059047176
Sure, Beck can and often does use hyperbolic rhetoric to make his points, but it seems that is all you, and other liberals focus on, almost like thin skinned whiners.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...s-palin-book-fact-check-5.html#post1058378540
One thing that liberals for sure have done with their boldness in steaming forward with their agenda regardless of what the people want, is that they have revealed themselves as liars, thin skinned, arrogant, petty, and childish.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...isits-fort-hood-victims-3.html#post1058356887
See I find those in the Obama camp as well as the narcissist n chief quite thin skinned when it comes to pointing out the obvious flaws in the mans persona.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-negro-dialect-comment-13.html#post1058489505
But I think that it shows the true thin skinned nature of liberals that are crying so loudly here Cap......;)

:lamo

Projecting much J-Mac? :lamo
 
Projecting much J-Mac? :lamo

As usual, you try and compare that rhetoric about public officials, and the whining seen in here between members, coupled with childish jabs....Like I said, as usual you fail.

j-mac
 
As usual, you try and compare that rhetoric about public officials, and the whining seen in here between members, coupled with childish jabs....Like I said, as usual you fail.

j-mac
Quit being so thin-skinned dude. :cool:
 
that is incorrect. simply because you have made a plan to spend some money does not mean that it is already spent. we had plenty of income to cover all of our previous spending (our debt). which, of course, is why there was no real threat of default.

No, it was ALREADY SPENT. It is money we owe people for bonds they bought from us that were due, payments of veteran's benefits and social security that we are legally obligated to pay, bills for electricity at government buildings, salaries for hours people already worked... You guys really need to get that through your head. Your representatives were not fighting to cut spending, they were fighting to refuse to pay for spending they already authorized just 2 months ago. How did you think it worked? Did you think we paid contractors in advance or something? Many of these bills are due for multiple year projects, some of it for work completed or goods delivered a year or more ago. Tanks and missiles and whatnot that we ordered more than a year ago, they built and delivered, and now you guys wanted to just refuse to pay for them. That's what your representatives were pushing for.
 
Last edited:
No, it was ALREADY SPENT. It is money we owe people for bonds they bought from us that were due, payments of veteran's benefits and social security that we are legally obligated to pay, bills for electricity at government buildings, salaries for hours people already worked... You guys really need to get that through your head. Your representatives were not fighting to cut spending, they were fighting to refuse to pay for spending they already authorized just 2 months ago. How did you think it worked? Did you think we paid contractors in advance or something? Many of these bills are due for multiple year projects, some of it for work completed or goods delivered a year or more ago. Tanks and missiles and whatnot that we ordered more than a year ago, they built and delivered, and now you guys wanted to just refuse to pay for them. That's what your representatives were pushing for.

That is just a little more than blatant misrepresentation. The actual fight on the debt ceiling increase was over taxation vs. a miniscule cut in projected spending increases. And the TEA party forced a much needed change in language of DC. Libs like Waters don't like this because for years they have lulled the repub RHINO's in DC to sleep, and to go along with ever increasing spending that forced this issue.

But, let's take a look at SS spending. By all forecasts from the actuaries that program is going broke in a hurry unless something is done. Now, the proposal was for those persons over 50 years of age today, their benefits wouldn't be touched, however, those under 50 would start seeing the age increase over time, and believe me, I am 49 yrs old this past week, so I would get screwed, but this has to be done. Yet libs mischaracterized it to sound like everyone, even those collecting now would be effected....That was a lie.

j-mac
 
That is just a little more than blatant misrepresentation. The actual fight on the debt ceiling increase was over taxation vs. a miniscule cut in projected spending increases. And the TEA party forced a much needed change in language of DC. Libs like Waters don't like this because for years they have lulled the repub RHINO's in DC to sleep, and to go along with ever increasing spending that forced this issue.

But, let's take a look at SS spending. By all forecasts from the actuaries that program is going broke in a hurry unless something is done. Now, the proposal was for those persons over 50 years of age today, their benefits wouldn't be touched, however, those under 50 would start seeing the age increase over time, and believe me, I am 49 yrs old this past week, so I would get screwed, but this has to be done. Yet libs mischaracterized it to sound like everyone, even those collecting now would be effected....That was a lie.

j-mac

You're just ranting about how you think cutting spending is good, not contradicting what I am saying. They threatened to destroy the economy in retribution if they didn't get their way. Right? You may think they are fighting for a noble cause, and I may think they are a bunch of ignorant hicks that are in way, way, over their heads and who are hell bent on transferring even more of our nation's wealth into the pockets of the uberrich. Either way though, we should be able to agree that threatening to destroy the economy of the country if you don't get your way is not acceptable. It is not acceptable for Al Qaeda to do it and it is not acceptable for politicians to do it.
 
Last edited:
You're just ranting about how you think cutting spending is good, not contradicting what I am saying. They threatened to destroy the economy in retribution if they didn't get their way. Right? You may think they are fighting for a noble cause, and I may think they are a bunch of ignorant hicks that are in way, way, over their heads and who are hell bent on transferring even more of our nation's wealth into the pockets of the uberrich. Either way though, we should be able to agree that threatening to destroy the economy of the country if you don't get your way is not acceptable.

That is not what they did, that is how liberals characterized what they were doing...Which was yet another lie.

j-mac
 
That is not what they did, that is how liberals characterized what they were doing...Which was yet another lie.

j-mac

Do you have any support for your position? Or are you just asserting a conclusion with no basis? They openly threatened to force the nation to default unless they got their way on a laundry list of issues. It's on the record 100s of times. Are you denying that they did that?
 
That is not what they did, that is how liberals characterized what they were doing...Which was yet another lie.

j-mac

But...but...but...Rachael Maddow said so.
 
Do you have any support for your position? Or are you just asserting a conclusion with no basis? They openly threatened to force the nation to default unless they got their way on a laundry list of issues. It's on the record 100s of times. Are you denying that they did that?

Absolutely, as a matter of fact Tea party leaders were all over the media stating that they were NOT advocating a default, but that rather just no increase to the debt ceiling. The two were totally different.

j-mac
 
Absolutely, as a matter of fact Tea party leaders were all over the media stating that they were NOT advocating a default, but that rather just no increase to the debt ceiling. The two were totally different.

j-mac

Yeah one would happen first, followed directly after by the other. First the rape, then the baby.
 
Absolutely, as a matter of fact Tea party leaders were all over the media stating that they were NOT advocating a default, but that rather just no increase to the debt ceiling. The two were totally different.

j-mac

That is like saying "certainly I would never advocate falling behind on your mortgage, I would just advocate not paying your mortgage payments."
 
Let the misrepresentation by libs continue without me....

j-mac
 
Stupid Congresswoman from California says something stupid. Dog bites man.

Unless she's openly competing for Pelosi's crown for Miss Stupid California, it's a non-issue.
 
Argh. This is so frustrating to me that still now folks on the right just are fundamentally mixing up what the default was about. It wasn't about cutting spending. Cutting spending would be a good thing. This wasn't that. This was money ALREADY SPENT that they were threatening not to pay the bills on. That is bankruptcy. It isn't like not getting a new credit card so you spend less, it is like buying a home and then refusing to pay the mortgage

Or you can dismiss the pool guy, cancel the country club membership, stop the vacations to Hawaii and Europe, and pay the mortgage. This way you don't increase your debt, you pay it off. Why is that so hard to figure out?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1059751059 said:
Or you can dismiss the pool guy, cancel the country club membership, stop the vacations to Hawaii and Europe, and pay the mortgage. This way you don't increase your debt, you pay it off. Why is that so hard to figure out?

You seriously just aren't understanding. It isn't a question of whether you want the pool guy to come next month, it is a question of whether to pay him for the cleaning he did last month.... Congress is free to reduce spending at any time, but to continue spending, then just refuse to pay for the stuff they're spending... That's just despicable and totally suicidal as a nation.
 
You seriously just aren't understanding. It isn't a question of whether you want the pool guy to come next month, it is a question of whether to pay him for the cleaning he did last month.... Congress is free to reduce spending at any time, but to continue spending, then just refuse to pay for the stuff they're spending... That's just despicable and totally suicidal as a nation.

I'm thinking the same about you. Pay what you owe, period. In addition, stop the spending increases as well as current spending, which includes cutting federal programs. Less government means less waste.

There was enough money to pay bills without going broke.

This list isn't exhaustive, but there are plenty of programs here that are not necessary and some should have never been funded, period.

http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/08/16/15-government-programs-we-dont-need/

Examples of Government Waste

House GOP Spending Cuts: The List - Washington Wire - WSJ
 
Stupid Congresswoman from California says something stupid. Dog bites man.

Unless she's openly competing for Pelosi's crown for Miss Stupid California, it's a non-issue.

Maxine the marxist meathead was the turd who justified some of her constituents beating white truck driver Reginald Denny to a pulp after the wilding and rioting following those cops winning the first round of trials involving the beat down of that crack head Rodney King.
 

Well, here we have it...The more civil tone....When Gov. Perry says something that liberals don't like the call is all about civility, yet Maxine Waters, the socialist can say whatever she wants.....Pure Allensky.

j-mac

The battle for 2012 is going to be ugly. But civility in politics is a myth

 
Maxine said "tea party can go to hell and I will help send them there" if a republican said something like that about a Dem it would be considered a death threat and there would be calls for him or her to resign.


Of course, those calls would be drowned out by the sound of cheering from the other side of the aisle.

The problem with our government isn't Democrats. It isn't Republicans. It couldn't possibly be conservatives, as they are as rare as whooping cranes. The problem is hyper partisanship.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom